Congress has the votes to pass an amendment to the military appropriations bill that will overturn Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Bill Clinton came into office promising to eliminate the ban against gays in the military and ran into a buzzsaw of opposition, both in the military and in Congress. DADT was the 1993 "compromise" that was supposed to allow gays to be soldiers as long as they stayed in the closet.
It was a disaster. Besides forcing people to live a lie, and making them vulnerable to being outed by others, it cost the government millions and millions of dollars to train replacements for the 13,000 who were discharged in these past 16 years -- most notoriously a number of vitally needed translators of Arabic and other crucial languages that we already had too few of.
The House may vote as early as today and apparently has a comfortable majority; it's closer in the Senate, but it also seems assured there since Ben Nelson said he would support it.
But, as significant as this will be, it itself is a compromise with possible sour notes. In order to secure enough votes, the amendment was modified to allow the military to take as much time as it needs to implement the orders. Of course, there are many complicated issues that must be worked out: What about rights of partners in states that do not have civil unions? What about survivors' rights for partner benefits that conflict with other federal statutes? But it also leaves it open for recalcitrant senior officers to drag their feet.
At least one recent poll of those who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan showed that 73% were comfortable with gay people in their ranks. It's the older officers that constitute the main problem.
But, guess what, guys? Your military ranks ALREADY contain gay and lesbian soldiers, sailors, and marines. What do you think is going to be different? Why do you fear that they're suddenly going to assault you in the showers, creep into your beds at night? Don't flatter yourselves, you old jerks and dried up prunes. You'll be disappointed to learn that nothing very different is going to happen. At least that's the experience of all the other nations that allow gays to serve openly in their military.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is yet another opportunity for John McCain to display his utter lack of integrity and his political cynicism and duplicity.
ReplyDeleteIn October 2006 he said we should listen to our military leaders and take their advice on this matter. Now that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has made a genuine, heartfelt push for repeal and the Chairman of the Department of Defense has supported it -- McCain is pandering to his right-wing constituency and saying not just no, but hell no.
Does anyone still have a shred of respect for this man? He really painted himself into a corner on this one. He probably never imagined that a military leader would ever recommend repeal, so he thought he could have it both ways -- seem to be open to gay issues but never have to cast a vote for repeal.
It's not just changing his mind on an issue, he's reversing what he said about whom we should listen to in deciding such an issue. That's what makes it so utterly lacking in integrity.